How Singapore can become more productive than it can imagine

As the squeeze on foreign workers increases the question that Singapore is asking employers and employees is how can you become more productive?

Interestingly in recent National Day interviews (timed with the launch of his new book) Lee Kuan Yew (LKY) himself said he was against squeezing the number foreigners being allowed to work in the country.

He pioneered the need to bring in expertise and resource as and when and where needed to help grow the economy and bring in skills/experience that was not available locally or to complement existing skills. 

LKY said that Singapore was in danger of becoming the new Japan with minimal birth rate meaning a decreasing indigenous population and with no foreigners welcome leading to a decreasing/stagnant economy and a worrying future where most of the population is retired and the young people have all left. His pioneering and vision led to Singapore to be as prosperous and dynamic as it is.

So how can there be a balance between steadying the number of foreigners coming in (to satisfy the reactionaries, as LKY said there is no economic reason for doing this otherwise as it leads to a slowdown in the economy) and an increase in productivity?

Where do we need to become more productive? All industries or just manufacturing? Service industries are stretched with manpower shortages and in the contexts of things like restaurant or hotel service it’s better to serve less well than more poorly. Tripadvisor sees to that! It is therefore a real challenge to improve productivity in this context. Quality cannot always be quick.

What can we do to become more productive o\in the office or on a building site or manufacturing plant? Speed up? Get in earlier? Spend less time on facebook? Less time playing games on mobiles? This surely comes down to the goals set out by directors and how they are implemented by managers and how employees feel ownership for these goals and implement them.

Some workers will already be stretched especially in areas where there are skills shortages. Some may not be motivated enough to do more than enough to pick up a pay cheque.

According to the Ministry of Trade and Industry (MIT), “the experiences of the developed countries have shown that productivity growth tends to slow as a country becomes more developed due to diminishing returns from quantitative increase in inputs”.

There is a point where if people are working as hard as possible, producing the maximum they can that the only way to increase productivity is to employ more people or for the existing people to work longer hours. The later point has a diminishing return, studies show that you are much less effective when working late after a long day than when you are (hopefully) fresh in the morning.

There is a school of thought in the UK/US where some companies have tried this, that working 4 days a week and having 3 days off makes a person and therefore an employer more productive. The theory goes that if people know that they only have 4 days to achieve their goals they do it in 4. If they know they have 5 they relax more and still may achieve their goals but do it within 5 days.

The other reason why 3 days off as oppose to 2 is that the body and mind refreshes greater after 3 days not at work than the 2 that most people have. One day to recover from the week and then the next day you’re gearing back up to work again. The third day actually gives your batteries more time to recharge.

However many employers would be hard to convince about this and to buy into it and unless the owner of the company is leading this initiative it is unlikely to succeed in being implemented.

There is also the question of measurement. You can measure when people produce more widgets but how do measure an increase in productivity for a waitress or bank clerk or account manager in an agency? Serve more people? If the people aren’t there, how? If they are, some may take greater dealing with than others. Quality of service matters more than numbers served as does accuracy.

Could you measure more tasks being completed in an office? If the tasks are day to day jobs that’s hard to measure if they are overarching ones such as winning a new client or getting an existing one to spend more how does an increase in productivity in this context sit with existing goals?

Just increasing targets doesn’t make sense if the market you’re in does not sustain it…just leads to people leaving due to unrealistic targets and expectations.

There are also two fundamental reasons why Singapore is unique when it comes to productivity challenges: people leaving jobs and MC.

There is virtually full employment in Singapore, especially for Singaporeans. This leads to people leaving jobs 1) without a job to go to as they may live at home with their parents and have the financial security to do so and 2) leaving for a better title and/or for a small increase in salary at the drop of a hat.

If people are not committed to the jobs and can leave and get another easily if they feel like it or just because the job becomes too challenging then it’s harder for employers to focus them on an increase in productivity to start off with.

Singapore also has a unique way of dealing with medical leave (MC). Everyone has a contract which allows them 14 days off for MC a year. It’s a standing joke amongst expats that Singaporeans believe that this is part of their holidays and regularly take all 14 days, normally on Monday’s, Friday’s or before/after public holidays. Why not? It’s there to be used. Some people will be genuine, some will abuse it.

However it does lead to more people taking these 14 days off to supplement their holiday entitlement (which to be fair is less than they would get in Europe/Australia). This means all companies lose these 14 days of effective working before they even begin.

If Singapore really wanted to increase productivity then preventing people from moving jobs easily and clamping down on rogue MC would be two ways to go about it. But that is easier said than done! What do you think?